Abstract
No sport is as closely tied to the business world as golf, which has long served as a powerful networking tool. Historically the game has been dominated by male players, reinforcing the perception of golf as an “old boys club,” where access to influential networks is disproportionally available to men. This exclusivity creates a double-barreled impact, as it perpetuates systemic inequities that restrict women's full participation in both leisure and professional settings. With only 26% of golfers identifying as women, the sport remains a male-dominated space amplifying the challenges of tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure. This imbalance also persists in the business world, where women hold only 29% of C-suite positions and where 90% of chief executive officers golf. This study explores the interconnected structural, cultural, and historical barriers that contribute to the “grass ceiling,” by applying the frameworks of tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure. Findings from a survey of 323 business professionals reveal that women are more likely to encounter discrimination and perceive golf as less accessible than men. Moreover, the impact of tokenism heightens visibility pressures on women golfers, statistical discrimination reinforces gendered stereotypes, and social closure mechanisms maintain institutional barriers to access. Men, on the other hand, report higher satisfaction and greater perceived benefits from golf. To address these inequities, this study provides recommendations for the golf industry and business leaders to address structural barriers and modernize golf's cultural narratives. By tackling these barriers, golf can move beyond its exclusionary past and become a more inclusive, equitable, environment in both leisure and professional settings.
Keywords
No sport is as closely tied to the business world as golf, which has long served as a powerful networking tool (Agarwal et al., 2016; Alamo, 2023; Arthur et al., 2011; Baumgartner & Schneider, 2010; Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Cullen & Perez-Truglia, 2023; Gray et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2020; Morgan & Martin, 2006; Pearson, 2024). Golf's legacy as an exclusive space highlights its role as a sport uniquely intertwined with professional opportunities and corporate culture (Ceron-Anaya, 2010). Historically the game has been dominated by male players, reinforcing the perception of golf as an “old boys club,” where access to influential networks is disproportionally available to men (Biggerstaff et al., 2023). This exclusivity creates a double-barreled impact, as it perpetuates systemic inequities that restrict women full participation in both business (B-Golf) and leisure (L-Golf) settings (Agarwal et al., 2016; Cerón-Anaya, 2019). To examine these challenges, we follow the lead of McGinnis et al. (2005) who employ three interlinked theoretical frameworks—tokenism, statistical discriminations, and social closure. Together these frameworks highlight the structural, cultural, and interpersonal dynamics that perpetuate gender inequities in golf in both leisure and professional settings (Kanter, 1977; McGinnis et al., 2005).
Recent growth in golf participation, especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, has attracted a younger and more diverse demographic to the sport. Women's participation is rising, and younger generations such as Gen X, Y, and Z are taking up the sport in growing numbers (Brown, 2024; National Golf Foundation, 2024). This surge reveals a long-overlooked demand and provides opportunities for the golf industry to reimagine its cultural norms and infrastructure. However, as Kitching (2022) argues, these demographic shifts have not fully dismantled the entrenched barriers women face. The persistence of exclusionary practices underscores that the “grass ceiling” remains firmly in place, even as the sport becomes more popular.
There are several previous studies that investigate gender disparities in golf. For example, McGinnis and Gentry (2006) use a qualitative approach to examine how golf rituals, like gendered tee boxes, perpetuate gender gaps. In the textual narrative approach used by Reis and Correia (2013) they suggest that the exclusion of women in golf is more likely to be cultural rather than explicit discrimination. Using content analysis, Gray et al. (2020) examined golf's impact on women's careers in business finding positive connections between golf networking and career success. In focus groups conducted on women in sales, Morgan and Martin (2006) find that women sometimes face sexual advances and harassment in homosocial settings like golf and strip clubs. Using interviews, McGinnis and Gentry (2006) conclude that rather than “celebrating the differences between men and women, it appears that golf would be better served in the long run, to reduce these differences” (p. 239).
Arthur et al. (2011) employed a quantitative analysis of 496 golf courses and data from the Public Use Microdata Sample, finding that the greater the distance between the “men's and women's tees,” the lower the salary and participation rate among women, particularly in the sales and marketing professions.
Gender and racial ideologies present in sports can create structures and spaces that adversely impact women (Melton & Bryant, 2017). Gender ideology refers to beliefs about masculinity and femininity and gendered relationships, whereas racial ideology refers to beliefs about physical traits (skin color) or ancestry that leads to social hierarchies. Assumptions regarding abilities and positionality that are rooted in gender and racial ideologies can be the basis for social practices and policies (structures) that lead to the marginalization of women and ethnic minority groups (Coakley, 2020).
Crenshaw’s (1991) concept of intersectionality is a relevant framework and lens to view this study because of its emphasis on the intersections of gender and race. The concept suggests taking into account more than single categories (e.g., women) by considering intersections where marginalization multiplies (e.g., women with disabilities) (Pape et al., 2023). Other intersections include culture, economic status, religion, and sexism. Shields argues that “intersectionality first and foremost reflects the reality of lives. The facts of our lives reveal that there is no single identity category that satisfactorily describes how we respond to our social environment or are responded to by others” (p. 304). Intersectional experiences and identity construction are connected to structural elements, such as organizations, policies, and practices, that are found in the workplace and in practically all sports, including golf, where oppression and discrimination can persist (Carter-Francique & Flowers, 2013; McDowell & Carter-Francique, 2017; Shields, 2008; Walker & Melton, 2015).
Given the limited quantitative research on gender dynamics in golf, this study adopts an exploratory approach. Rather than testing specific hypothesis, we examine how the theoretical constructs of tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure manifest in the experiences and perceptions of business professionals. This study extends the research of previous studies by using survey research to examine the interplay between gendered perceptions, structural barriers, and discriminatory behaviors in B-Golf. Since tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure shape golf in both leisure and business contexts (Kanter, 1977), this research builds on previous studies that have primarily examined golf as a leisure activity. Specifically, we asked participants about their perceptions of accessibility, professional benefits, experiences of discrimination, and attitudes about golf as a career tool. As an exploratory study, our objective was to identify patterns and associations rather than identify predefined hypotheses and attempt to estimate true population values. In this study, we address the following research questions about B-Golf: Research question 1: Do the gendered perceptions of accessibility, professional benefits, and stress relief in B-Golf reflect the dynamics of tokenism and influence participation in golf? Research question 2: How does statistical discrimination manifest in the experiences and behaviors of men and women on the golf course and what does this tell us about cultural barriers in B-Golf? Research question 3: How does statistical discrimination influence the awareness and acknowledgment of potentially discriminatory behaviors among men and women in B-Golf. Research question 4: How do structural barriers (social closure) such as access, time availability, and experiences of discrimination influence attitudes toward B-Golf, particularly for women?
Theoretical Framework: How Tokenism, Discrimination, and Social Closure Reinforce Gender Inequities in Golf
Tokenism: Heightened Visibility and Performance Pressure
Kanter's (1977, 2008) seminal work on tokenism in corporate America offers a valuable lens for examining the experiences of women in male-dominated spaces such as golf. Tokenism refers to the inclusion of a small number of people from an underrepresented group giving the appearance of inclusivity. According to Kanter (1977) there are five key characteristics of tokenism: statistical minority, heightened visibility, stereotyping, performance pressure, and exclusion from informal dynamics.
Tokenism exists that when individuals comprise less than 15% of a group making them a statistical minority (Kanter, 1977). This threshold is that point at which visibility, stereotyping, and role entrapment are intensified. At this low level of representation individuals lack sufficient numbers to influence group culture or norms. Some studies suggest that the statistical minority threshold is closer to 30% (Konrad & Kramer, 2006) while others describe it as a contextual number, and not fixed (Childs & Krook, 2008; Schaefer et al., 2015).
With only 26% of golfers identifying as women, the sport remains a male-dominated space, amplifying the challenges of tokenism (National Golf Foundation, 2023). This imbalance parallels the business world, where women hold only 29% of C-suite positions (Krivkovich et al., 2024). Being underrepresented in the golf space has significant implications for women in business, particularly given that 90% of Fortune 500 chief executive officers play golf and who credit it as a key tool for their networking and career advancement (Lee et al., 2020; Pearson, 2024). For the few women who do golf, many report its positive impact on their careers (Gray et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2020).
These disparities highlight the structural inequities that hinder women's ability to leverage golf as a leisure activity and as a professional resource, particularly since they represent 52% of the workforce (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2023a). Being the only women golfer at a business-related event places extra pressure on performance and scrutiny, potentially deterring future participation for career enhancing networking opportunities (Lee et al., 2020; Taminiau & Wiersma, 2016). Tokenism in golf parallels similar dynamics in professional networking, where women's presence in male-dominated spaces often leads to similar pressures (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Kitching, 2022; Lee et al., 2020; Taminiau & Wiersma, 2016).
Statistical Discrimination: Generalized Stereotypes in Practice
The concept of statistical discrimination explains how generalized assumptions about group characteristics are unfairly applied to individuals (England, 2017). As statistical minorities, women golfers often experience heightened visibility, where they report feeling ignored, overlooked, or unimportant (Kitching, 2018). McGinnis et al. (2005) highlight that women golfers frequently feel judged not only as individuals but as representatives of their gender. According to Kanter (1977) statistical discrimination often leads the majority members to exaggerate the perceived differences between the two groups leading to further isolation.
This heightened scrutiny creates an environment where women must overperform to be seen as legitimate participants, yet any perceived shortcoming reinforces stereotypes about commitment to the sport, or a lack of skill (Kitching, 2018; McGinnis et al., 2005). This scrutiny extends beyond athletic performance to their role in networking (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; McGinnis & Gentry, 2006). Being only one of a few women at a corporate golf outing amplifies this scrutiny, where their golfing ability may be unfairly associated with their professional competence (Kitching, 2018; McGinnis & Gentry, 2006).
Stereotypes about women golfers abound. For example, that they are slower players with shorter drives (Barrera, 2023), physically weaker (Reis & Correia, 2013), more focused on socializing than serious competition (Cashmore, 2010), that they exhibit an exaggerated playing style (George, 2009), and that they are emotionally unstable or incompetent (Haig-Muir, 1998). These biases contribute to barriers that prevent their full inclusion in the sport in both leisure and business settings.
Unfortunately, these stereotypes are self-reinforcing: heightened visibility due to tokenism amplifies the impact of such biases, discouraging women from participating or persisting in the sport (McGinnis & Gentry, 2006). In the context of business networking, these stereotypes mirror those in professional settings, where women often face assumptions about their leadership potential or professional competence based on gendered stereotypes (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Greguletz et al., 2019; Kanter, 1977, 2008).
Social Closure: Institutionalizing Exclusion
When will closure be open? According to Kitching (2022), it does not look promising. Despite recent efforts to address gender disparities, golf remains entrenched in “pervasive patriarchal power relations” (p. 277), with many clubs resisting meaningful change (Kitching, 2022). Structural barriers exist at the micro and macro levels from local golf courses to national governing bodies, demonstrating that progress is often rhetorical and not reality.
Weber et al.’s (1978) concept of social closure provides a macro-level framework for understanding how institutional practices and cultural norms perpetuate exclusion. Social closure occurs when dominant groups monopolize resources and opportunities, systematically excluding others through formal and informal practices (Murphy, 2001). McGinnis et al. (2005) identify numerous examples of social closure in golf, including the physical design of courses (e.g., gendered tee boxes), limited merchandising for women, and unwelcoming clubhouse environments. Other examples include male only clubhouse spaces, restrictions on tee times, all male memberships (Kitching, 2018), separate governing bodies (George, 2009), and language and terminology, for example, “ladies’ tees” (Cerón-Anaya, 2019; Cherry, 2021; cf. Arthur et al., 2011). Finally, women remain underrepresented in leadership roles across the golf industry in fields like course management, architecture, and greenkeeping (Kitching, 2022; Wilson, 2019). Meanwhile, research links diverse management teams to greater financial success, reinforcing the importance of more women in leadership (Beeson & Valerio, 2012).
Even today, these slow-to-change practices signal that women are outsiders in a space constructed for men (Kitching, 2022). In the professional sphere, similar mechanisms of social closure operate to exclude women from influential networks and opportunities for advancement (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Ceron-Anaya, 2010; Kanter, 1977, 2008). Golf's historical exclusivity has long positioned it as more than just a sport—it is an extension of professional networking where access to decision making, career opportunities, and mentorship often require participation (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Cullen & Perez-Truglia, 2023). By controlling access to these settings, the dominant group reinforces existing power structures, ensuring that the benefits remain available to only men (Cerón-Anaya, 2019).
Together, tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure offer a comprehensive interlinked framework for analyzing the gendered dynamics of golf in both L-Golf and B-Golf settings. Tokenism operates at the interpersonal level, shaping women's day-to-day experiences on the golf course. Statistical discrimination functions at both interpersonal and structural levels, perpetuating stereotypes that justify exclusionary practices. Social closure continues to exacerbate the broader institutional and cultural barriers that reinforce and institutionalize barriers to golf participation. By applying an interlinked theoretical framework, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of how gendered dynamics in golf both reflect and perpetuate broader societal inequities.
While our study is centered on business professionals, our findings also carry implications for leisure golfers. Future research might explore whether men and women perceive and experience B-Golf and L-Golf differently, shedding light on unique barriers and opportunities across settings. Other factors such as ability, sexual orientation, and economic status that may intersect with gender and race should be investigated to understand the influence that other factors may have on experiences and opportunities in golf and other sports.
Surveying the Landscape of B-Golf
Methodology
Initial participants for this study were recruited through a series of email distributions facilitated by a third-party vendor. However, due to a low response rate, insufficient sample size, and resource constraints, the recruitment strategy was adjusted. To enhance participation, we leveraged an internal database comprising over 1,200 MBA alumni from a mid-sized university in the United States.
Prior to distributing the survey, two focus groups were conducted with 26 women who all work for Fortune 500 companies with both women golfers (n = 10) and nongolfers (n = 16). Sessions were held off-site in a neutral meeting space, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed in NVivo 12.2 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). Data collection continued until no new themes emerged, indicating thematic saturation (Krippendorff, 2019). Five dominate themes emerged: structural access and fairness (cost, time pressure, frustration/anger at the expectation to golf in order to get ahead), interpersonal climate (tokenism, stereotyping, on-course microaggressions), career utility (networking advantages, visibility to senior leaders), psychological safety and skill confidence (fear of judgement, need for formal instruction, fear of sexual harassment), and logistical support needs (equipment, childcare). These sessions provided qualitative insights to refine survey items, ensuring clarity and relevance to diverse participant experiences. Additionally, the survey instrument underwent a rigorous Institutional Review Board process to ensure ethical compliance, methodological soundness, and protection of participant rights.
We collected 323 usable responses from business professionals through an online survey administered via Qualtrics. Participants included 173 men and 150 women, creating a fairly balanced gender distribution. The demographics revealed a predominantly white sample (75%), with smaller percentages identifying as African American (10%), Asian (6%), Native American (1%), Hispanic (1%), and other (8%). More than 94% of respondents were from the United States. Additionally, 96% held at least a bachelor's degree, with 22% earning advanced degrees. The average age of respondents was 37 years.
Nearly half of respondents (45.2%) identified as golfers, with an average of 15 years of experience. Over half of the respondents (181 out of 323) reported working for organizations that foster a golf culture. This further demonstrates golf's unique connection to the business world, despite its historical exclusivity. Notably, more than 60% viewed B-Golf as a tool that enhances equity and inclusion.
To better understand the gendered dynamics of B-Golf, we conducted independent samples t-tests, chi-square analysis, and multiple regression analysis. Ordinary least squares regression was employed in this exploratory study that looked in part at attitudes toward golf that are held by men and women working in business. Multiple regression was selected over structural equation modeling (SEM), for example, because regression focuses on examining the direct relationship between one or more independent variables and a single dependent variable, whereas SEM focuses on the analysis of more complex relationships with models that may include indirect effects (e.g., mediation). Our investigation also focused on perceptions of accessibility, experiences of discrimination, and professional benefits. Guided by the frameworks of tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure (Kanter, 1977; McGinnis et al., 2005), we sought to determine who structural, cultural, and interpersonal barriers impact participation. While progress has been made in increasing diversity in the sport, the golf course remains a place where business professionals encounter distinct challenges and opportunities. The differences emerge in how both genders perceive career-related benefits and in the structural and social barriers that affect access and participation. These disparities shape their ability to use golf to foster business relationships and professional success.
By examining the data on gendered experiences and attitudes, we can better understand how the dynamics of tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure reinforce inequities.
Results
Do the gendered perceptions of accessibility, professional benefits, and stress relief in B-Golf reflect the dynamics of tokenism and influence participation in golf? Table 1 illustrates stark disparities in perceptions of golf across genders. Men gave higher ratings than women regarding golf's ability to provide relaxation, stress relief, and satisfaction, particularly to reduce work-related stress. Men also found golf more useful for business networking and professional success and were more likely to recommend B-Golf to others.
Gender Differences in Perceptions of Golf.
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
While both men and women enjoyed sharing their golf experiences socially, women were significantly more likely to view the sport as less accessible. This reflects the dynamics of tokenism, where women's minority status likely amplifies their perceptions of exclusion and reinforces their experiences of limited access. Notably, perceptions of accessibility were moderate for both genders, highlighting nuances in the sport's inclusivity.
Addressing these disparities requires tackling system barriers to tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure.
How does statistical discrimination manifest in the experiences and behaviors of men and women on the golf course and what does this tell us about cultural barriers in B-Golf?
Table 2 highlights that women were significantly more likely than men to report experiencing discrimination on the golf course (χ2(1, N = 323) = 3.589; p = .05). This finding may reflect the role of statistical discrimination, where group-level assumptions about women perpetuate inequitable treatment in male dominated spaces like golf. As shown in Table 2, the crosstabulation of gender and experiences of discrimination on the golf course produced a chi-square test statistic significant at the .05 alpha level, indicating a statistically significant association between gender and the likelihood of encountering discrimination on the golf course compared to men.
Gender Differences in Discrimination Encountered on the Golf Course.
How does statistical discrimination influence the awareness and acknowledgment of potentially discriminatory behaviors among men and women in B-Golf? Table 3 shows that, men and women showed no significant differences in self-reported discriminatory behavior (χ2(1, N = 323) = 0.145; p = .70). However, a small percentage (<15%) of both males and females admitted to engaging in potentially discriminatory actions. This suggests that while statistical discrimination disproportionately impacts women's experiences, a lack of awareness of one's own behavior contributes to its persistence. Participants were not asked to classify or describe the potential discriminatory act they may have engaged in. Their actions could have been perceived as potentially discriminatory based on gender or sexual identity or possibly race, color, age, or religion, for example. There is evidence in the literature that shows cisgender athletes are more accepting of transmen than transwomen in sports (Merrill & Anderson, 2024). Whether ciswomen tend to behave in a way that is discriminatory toward trans- or nonconforming women was not explored in the current study but warrants further investigation. The findings here highlight the need for cultural shifts and fostering self-awareness and promoting cultural shift within the golf community are important for reducing discriminatory practices and creating a more inclusive environment.
Gender Differences in Discriminatory Behavior on the Golf Course.
How do structural barriers such as access, time availability, and experiences of discrimination influence attitudes toward golf, particularly for women? Gender strongly predicts attitudes toward golf as shown in the regression analysis (Table 4) as evidenced by a standardized beta coefficient of −.669 (p < .001). This result underscores the relevance of social closure, where systemic barriers tied to access and time disproportionately affect women's attitude toward golf. This finding reinforces earlier results highlighting gender disparities in perceptions of accessibility, benefits, and discrimination in golf.
Ordinary Least Squares Multiple Regression of Attitudes Toward Golf.
R2 = .436.
The regression analysis reveals that access (β = .432, p < .001), time availability (β = .118, p = .010), discrimination (β = −.161, p < .001), and ethnicity (non-white vs. white; β = −.413, p = .002) were significant predictors of attitudes toward golf. Access and time availability positively influenced attitudes toward golf, while discrimination significantly decreased its perceived value, particularly for women. The ethnicity coefficient shows more positive attitudes toward golf among whites than non-whites. An interaction variable between gender and ethnicity was also entered into the regression model and was also significant (β = .378, p = .044). This indicates in addition to the significant main effects of gender and ethnicity on attitudes toward golf, the two variables combined produce an additional effect showing more negative attitudes among ethnic females.
These results demonstrate how structural barriers like access and time availability align with social closure, limiting their participation in golf for business and leisure. Interestingly, socioeconomic factors like age (p = .991), financial resources (p = .071), and income (p = .593) were not significant predictors, indicating that gender, ethnicity, and access-related disparities have a stronger impact on shaping attitudes toward golf. Golf is often criticized for being a wealthy person's sport, but the results suggest affordability is not a major issue perhaps reflecting the availability of inexpensive playing options in most markets, such as municipal courses and downscale mom and pop operations (Weston, 2024).
The negative influence of discrimination on attitudes toward golf highlights how cultural and interpersonal barriers, tied to statistical discrimination, erode its perceived value for women. This result also suggests that experiences of discrimination directly erode the perceived value of B-Golf as a networking tool, particularly for women but also for other victims of discrimination on the golf course. Addressing this issue is critical to fostering inclusivity.
These findings emphasize the importance of addressing both structural and cultural barriers to foster inclusivity within golf. By reducing tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure, the golf industry and corporate world can create environments that promote equitable participation reducing the double-barreled effects on women's participation in B-Golf and L-Golf.
Discussion and Recommendations: A Fair Game, Redefining Equity in Business and Leisure Golf
The findings of this study are consistent with other research concerning gender and race experiences in sports (see Blodgett et al., 2017; Calow, 2022; Simien et al., 2019). Intersectionality can aid in understanding gender and race issues that manifest in business and sports cultures. The perspective gained through the lens of intersectionality can help in resolving matters of marginalization and underrepresentation and in developing more inclusive sports structures (policies, programs, practices) and spaces where in this case women in golf can flourish.
Our findings, coupled with many others, highlight three persistent barriers to women's participation in golf: tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure (Biggerstaff et al., 2023; Ceron-Anaya, 2010, 2019; Kanter, 1977, 2008; McGinnis & Gentry, 2006; Morgan & Martin, 2006). To address these challenges, we propose six empirically grounded recommendations. To reduce feelings of exclusion, rooted in tokenism, we recommend eliminating outdated and symbolic practices and leveraging the simulator boom with a marketing campaign aimed at fostering a more inclusive entry point to the sport. To address cultural barriers tied to statistical discrimination, organizations should invest in more (and earlier) golf training and education for women and underrepresented groups. Finally, to address structural barriers we recommend ensuring that facilities are adaptive and accessible and we offer insight on how to the tackle time constraints that disproportionally affects women. Together these recommendations offer a path forward for organizations and the golf industry to foster more inclusive environments in both business and leisure contexts.
We acknowledge that industry initiatives demonstrate that some progress has been made in equalizing participation among the genders. For example, the LPGAUSA Girls Golf program now serves more than 100,000 juniors annually, 80% of whom are girls of color (girlsgolf.com, 2025). Recently the LPGA celebrated its one-millionth participant by launching a #OneMillionMORE girls campaign with a goal of 1 million more girls by 2030. Likewise, the PGA of America, PGA Tour, LPGA, and USGA support the “Make Golf Your Thing” initiative and have funded over 800 local diversity projects since 2021 (pgatour.com, 2023). These advances confirm momentum yet underscore the need to accelerate structural change.
Figure 1 provides a visual summary of our recommendations, and the following section outlines each recommendation in more detail.
Summary of recommendations.
Reduce Perceived Exclusion (Tokenism)
Eliminate Outdated and Symbolic Practices and Adopt Driver-Based Distance Tee Boxes
Tokenism thrives when underrepresented groups are visibly “marked” as Kanter (1977) emphasizes in her discussion on heightened visibility. Despite modest progress in moving away from gender-based tee boxes, their continued presence reinforces women's minority status by signaling that they do not belong in the same competitive space as men (USGA, 2023). Given that women-rated golf's overall accessibility significantly lower than men (Table 1), removing symbolic barriers like gender or age-labeled tees, is a concrete step to reduce tokenistic experiences on the course.
According to a USGA (2023) study 80% of surveyed golfers agree that renaming or recoloring tee boxes to gender and age-neutral options is a practical way to encourage appropriate tee selection. Yet nearly three-quarters of respondents still associate red and white tees with a specific suggesting that symbolic cues remain powerful. Additionally, a study conducted by the LPGA found that 91% of golfers agree that the stigmas associated with tee selection discourage players from choosing a tee that aligns with their ability. In contrast, almost all golfers surveyed (95%) agreed that golfers should be able to post their scores for handicap purposes from whatever tee they choose, regardless of gender. These findings suggest growing openness to breaking away from outdated traditions.
While assigning tee placement based on driver distance is not a perfect solution, it does shift the frame from gender and age to skill and performance. We acknowledge that ability-bases systems may still indirectly reflect physical differences between men and women, but they offer a more inclusive and depersonalized alternative. As older men, youth players and newcomers adopt forward tees these spaces will become more diverse and less stigmatized over time.
The USGA's recommendation to improve both the number and quality of the forward tees supports this transition by improving playability and signaling that these tee boxes are designed for slower swing speeds, regardless of gender or age, not just for women and seniors (USGA, 2023). Ultimately while drive-distance-based tee boxes are not a panacea, they represent a meaningful step toward making the game more equitable and enjoyable for all players.
Off-Course: Marketing the New Front Door to Golf
Emerging evidence shows that virtual and gamified golf environments accelerate both skill acquisition and lesson uptake. In a survey of 275 Korean screen golf participants, Lee et al. (2023) suggest that simulators’ affordability, convenience, and technology drive appeal and made participants more enthusiastic and motivated to participate in golf. The National Golf Foundation (2021) reports that 75% of first-time nongolfer Topgolf guests expressed interest in golf on-course; 29% said simulator use led them to play more on-course rounds.
Importantly, off-course golf participation is far more diverse than on-course participation. According to the National Golf Foundation (2025) women comprise 43% of off-course only participants and people of color account for 45%. Venues like Topgolf offer the relaxed social atmosphere of a bar or a bowling alley. They allow newcomers to build comfort and confidence without the formality or pressure that often comes with traditional on-course settings. This matters because our findings show that women are significantly less likely than men to associate golf with professional advancement and more likely to report discriminatory experiences (Tables 1 and 2). Moreover, our data show more positive attitudes toward golf among whites than non-whites and more negative attitudes among ethnic females. These patterns suggest that traditional golf spaces may inadvertently reinforce exclusion. Given that the off-course market is now valued at $1.74 billion and projected to grow at 9.4% per year through 2030, the industry has a financial and cultural incentive to take these spaces seriously (Grandview Research, n.d.).
Rather than viewing simulators as steppingstones to on-course golf, the golf industry could launch a targeted marketing campaign that legitimizes and celebrates off-course golf as a valid and inclusive entry point. Framing these venues as “real golf” can help expand belonging and sustain participation among historically underrepresented groups. A targeted marketing campaign can help move people from bays to fairways expanding belonging and countering the exclusionary legacy of traditional golf culture.
Address Cultural Barriers (Statistical Discrimination)
Invest in More (and Early) Golf Training and Education
The data show that women's participation is deterred by assumptions about their competence (Table 2), whereas men are more likely to associate golf with professional success than women (Table 1). Previous research shows that women are more likely to embrace golf when they receive formal instruction from a professional rather than informal guidance from friends or family (National Golf Foundation, 2024). A longitudinal study by Eime et al. (2020) suggests that the optimal age of entry for sustained sport participation is 6–9 years old with later starts sharply increasing dropout risk. The gender gap widens in early adolescence; by age 14 girls are twice as likely as boys to quit organized sport (ussocerfoundation.org, n.d.). These trends matter because continued engagement correlates with higher Grade Point Average, stronger leadership aspirations, and lower depressive-symptom scores for girls (Women’s Sport Foundation, 2021). Therefore, corporate and industry initiatives that wait until women are already in the workforce come far too late. Directing resources to younger age programming is essential to build the confidence and skill base that retains girls through their adolescent years.
A recent Bank of America initiative models how corporations can underwrite low-cost entry pathways in any sport, including golf. Their program provides children aged 6–18 with a free 1-year on-course membership providing access to tee times for $5 or less (youthoncourse.org, n.d.). This approach could easily translate to subsidized court time, rink fees, or league dues in other athletic contexts, fostering early access and long-term retention. Building skills and confidence early weakens the stereotypes that later whisper, “women don't belong,” narrowing the perception gap evident in the data. Targeted skill building might also close the gap between men and women's perceptions of golf as a tool for enhancing their professional success.
Address Structural Barriers (Social Closure)
Ensure Facilities are Adaptive and Accessible
The regression results (Table 4) show that perceived access to facilities is a significant predictor of positive attitudes toward golf. These findings underscore the importance of making golf environments physically and socially inclusive. For example, improving signage and walkability and providing rest rooms that are visible and equitably placed throughout the course can enhance the experience of a broader range of players. Ensuring that facilities are adaptive and accessible can reduce access disparities and help foster a more welcoming environment (Beukes et al., 2022; Monforte et al., 2022).
Address Time Constraints at the Grassroots Level
A recent study finds that married men spend about 3.5 h more per week on leisure than women (Feintzeig, 2023). This discrepancy amounts to nearly 23 days of missed leisure time for women. Meanwhile, women represent 59% of caregivers in the United States, with 61% doing so while being employed (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2023b). Since time availability (β = .209, p < .001) is a strong predictor of attitudes toward golf, continuing to support shorter more flexible formats at the grassroots level will make the game more accessible to all. The USGA offers a “Play 9 Toolkit” that includes badges, flyers, and social media images to help golf courses promote the Play 9 concept at the grassroots level (USGA, 2018). They also include ready-made social media content such as, “Only time for 9? You can still post a score! Get out and #Play9Golf” that could easily be incorporated into a bimonthly social media calendar. These resources highlight how the golf industry is beginning to adapt to modern time pressures, a factor that might explain the simulator boom. A future study might reveal that one of the primary drivers behind this boom is its minimal time commitment compared to on-course play.
Adopt a Precision-First Course-Design Ethos
“It is right that we should provide a severe test for the brilliant products of the links, but we must not create a hopeless proposition for the limit man…What matters if Mr. Hopeless Duffer's mightiest drive reaches only 140 yards? He is entitled to a fairway and to a route suited to every class of player” (MacKenzie, 1926, p. 92). Although MacKenzie wrote the pronoun “he,” his fundamental ideology was to design courses that were accessible to all skill levels. This is precisely the kind of accuracy-over-power philosophy that can reduce today's gender gap. From a social closure perspective, golf course design itself can function as a structural gatekeeper. The golf industry's historic response in the 20th century to increased yardages enabled by new technology (Smith, 1907) was to lengthen courses instead of making them more challenging. “The clamor to lengthen golf courses has been self-perpetuating. If we continue to be told we’re all hitting the ball further and that old courses are obsolete, then, inevitably, many will believe it” (Taylor, 2016). The data suggest that the opposite is true, golf professionals are not hitting the ball significantly further and longer courses do not enhance the enjoyment of the average amateur (Taylor, 2016). A recent USGA study empirically confirms this idea and reports “longer back tees at most courses will likely see limited use while shorter forward tees can experience more demand” (USGA.Com, 2022). Adopting a precision-first ethos to golf course design accommodates all ages and skill levels visibly demonstrating inclusivity. The monetary and societal benefit is also important; the precision-first design approach supports sustainability which aligns with Gen X and Gen Z priorities (Haller et al., n.d.).
The Old Boys are Out: Time to Level the Playing Field in Golf and Beyond
Reframing the narrative around B-Golf and L-Golf requires a collective effort from organizations, the golf industry, and individuals. Women often feel stigmatized as slower or less serious players (Barrera, 2023). While golf's history has positioned it as an exclusive and sometimes contentious networking tool (Alamo, 2023), addressing its persistent barriers can pave the way for a more inclusive and modernized approach in both professional and leisure settings.
Embracing intersectionality and diversity and fostering equitable practices allows the sport to shed its exclusionary past and position itself as a viable, inclusive option for professionals who wish to engage. This transformation not only enhances the sport's relevance but also ensures that golf remains a meaningful, equitable platform where all individuals can connect, grow, and thrive.
Importantly, the dynamics identified in golf—tokenism, statistical discrimination, and social closure—are not unique to this sport (e.g., Drenten et al., 2023). They echo across athletic and recreational contexts where social capital, leadership development, and informal networking converge. From company softball teams (Wachs, 2002) to pickup basketball (Vanzella-Yang & Finger, 2021; Zou & Scott, 2018) many sports reproduce power structures that restrict access and reinforce gendered assumptions. By exposing and addressing these dynamics within golf, this exploratory study aligns with previous research (e.g., Hindman et al., 2023; McGinnis et al., 2021; McGinnis & Gentry, 2006) and offers additional insights for advancing equity in sport more broadly, especially in spaces where professional advancement and athletic participation intersect.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article
Statement of Generative Artificial Intelligence Use
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) was used to enhance the formatting, clarity, and flow of this paper. Specifically, generative AI was used to:
Identify areas where transition sentences could improve the connection between ideas. Suggest shorter more concise words, for longer phrases, without altering the original meaning. Assist in brainstorming strategies to strengthen sections, combine sections, and reduce the overall length of the paper. Proofread for spelling and grammar errors. Cross reference in-text citations with references to identify gaps.